Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 11:00:50 -0500
From: Finn Lassen <finn.lassen@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Primary regulator, and motor mount plate
In-reply-to: <list-1860791@logan.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Message-id: <45E30432.4090203@verizon.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
References: <list-1860791@logan.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207)

Do the calculations on how many pounds of pressure are trying to force 
the engine apart during combustion and I think you'll feel better about 
the small loads from the prop.

Finn

Thomas y Reina Jakits wrote:
> Hi all,
>  
> Sandwich plate may work (even well), BUT it is not the cleanest 
> solution, more likely the simplest.
> This engine was never built to be a load carrying member of the drive 
> train (like some motorcycle or racing engines....).
> I don't even like the Mistral Engines solution ( and they probably did 
> a LOT of homework on this) - the backplate, altough the loadpath is 
> easier - straight through the engineblock, no turning forces 90º into 
> the sandwichplate and back 90º into the framemount.
> Personally I would keep any proploads (push/pull/torque) off the engine.
> A triangulated frame that attaches at the PSRU would be better - 
> Prop-Trans-Mount-Frame -
> The engine hangs on the other side and provides the power, nothing else.
> As long as you run direct-drive the torque will never be more than the 
> engine produces, but as soon as you ad rpm-reduction you introduce 
> more torque coming back into the engine-housing....
>  
> Am I wrong somewhere...??
>  
> Thomas J.
>  
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* George Lendich <mailto:lendich@optusnet.com.au>
>     *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft <mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
>     *Sent:* Saturday, February 24, 2007 4:48 PM
>     *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: Primary regulator, and motor mount plate
>
>
>      
>
>         Greetings,
>          
>         The Dominator gyro is on order, to arrive around the first
>         part of April (I hope).  The gear drive is still on order from
>         Autoflight, and hopefully, will be shipping soon.  All I can
>         do in the mean time is get the engine as ready as possible,
>         which mostly means making a new engine mount plate of some type.  
>          
>         Question one- If I were to make a sandwiched plate, similar to
>         what CCI does (did ?) with their mounts, how thick would it
>         need to be for a single rotor?  The CCI plate was 1/2" thick
>         for the two rotor, and I made my first single rotor mount that
>         thick as well.  Since I'd like to reduce some weight, I'm
>         wondering what I can cut this down to.  I'm guessing 3/8" at
>         least, and maybe 1/4".   Any suggestions?
>          
>         Second question, how much oil bypasses the primary regulator
>         (in the front cover) under normal operation?  Does any bypass
>         at all?  I know it's there primarily to prevent overpressure
>         of the oil cooler in case the lines get blocked, but I wonder
>         if it's actually needed for normal operation.  In other words,
>         can I plug up the primary regulator, and be OK as long
>         as nothing in the oil lines gets plugged up?  
>          
>         Thanks,
>         Rusty (waiting for Ed to try his favorite brazing rods on the
>         board)
>          
>         Rusty,
>         I like the mount plate for simplicity - however it does move,
>         and move enough to get leaks. Since this is a perceived
>         problem with the 2 rotor, I would leave it 1/2" for the one
>         rotor, with the required internal holes.
>         Just my opinion Matey!
>         George ( down under)
>